Hill v. Philadelphia Life Ins.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
SOPER, District Judge.
Au action, at law was brought below by the beneficiary of a life insurance policy which contained a provision that the payment of an installment of a premium would not maintain the policy in force beyond the date when the next installment should become payable, and that the failure to pay any premium or note when due would forfeit the policy. A note of the insured for part of the second annual premium was overdue and owing when the insured died, but the evidence showed that, before the note was due, an agent of the company agreed with the beneficiary to extend the time…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Northern Assurance Co. v. Grand View Building Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1902
- Insurance Co. v. NortonSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- New York Life Insurance v. FletcherSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Lumber Underwriters of NY v. RifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Columbia Mill Co. v. National Bank of CommerceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Thomas v. Prudential Ins.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1939
- Gannaway v. Standard Acc. Ins. Co. of DetroitCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1936